On 7 Jun 2013, at 12:21, Dave Crossland <d...@lab6.com> wrote: > On 7 June 2013 13:45, Vernon Adams <v...@newtypography.co.uk> wrote: >> >> to convert from my sources to a woff, is a clear 'modification', i would say. > > The OFL FAQ and I both disagree with this; WOFF is simply compression, > not modification, and it guarantees 100% that the data you put into > the compression process will be the data you get out. EOT and WOFF2 > can rearrange the data so it won't checksum the same, but it will be > the same for all practical purposes. The tools used to make > WOFF/EOT/WOFF2 may however make it very convenient to modify the fonts > (subsetting, etc) before compression is applied. > >> The main reason i would say it is a major modification, is because my OFL >> fonts >> have been designed and published to be used for web, print, whatever. > > Compressing them won't change that. > >> A woff is a totally useless format for quite a few end user situations. > > ? :)
So you're saying i should see the woff conversion as similar to distributing a font as a gzip or tar? and a user wouldnt expect to be able to use a gzipped font for all occasions (but they could for some), but it can be easilly enough decompressed for other uses? I guess i could buy that rationale :) > > Its trivial to decompress WOFF, and there are a handful of independent > implementaitons. Yes i will look for a good libre tool for that. > >> Hence why i would like to see a web tool that easilly identifies a >> woff font in a web page, extracts the font from the browser cache, >> converts it to OTF or TTF and downloads it for any other use. > > If you want to fund it, I can find a developer. Yes maybe, and i have asked around a little already. It seems more than worthwhile. -v